RE: [NTSysADM] Stupid terminology question

[geoff]

I recommend that you remove the words physical an virtual from your user interaction  Precisely.  That's why I am looking for a neutral term that distinguishes my side from theirs.    See my other response as to why "server" doesn't work. Seriously considering the 'Turbo Cool idea. I'm just Playbookin' around From: "Melvin Backus" <melvin.bac...@byers.com> To: "ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com" <ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com> Sent: 14 July, 2014 2:12 PM Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] Stupid terminology question I recommend that you remove the words physical an virtual from your user interaction vocabulary, they don’t care, know, or need to know in almost all cases.    Tell them that the TurboCool server which runs WizzBangApp is having problems with xyz and don’t worry about physical/virtual/whatever.  In cases where it’s actually a host issue, then modify it has TurboCool and HostGeek are part of the underlying infrastructure running your WizzBangApp.    Since you already know they only understand the app side of the equation, go ahead and reference both the app and the server in all your communications with them so that a) they have some clue what you’re talking about b) they begin to correlate the pieces together in the event that you slip up and forget or someone else references the server side without the app side name.   You can even extend the method to include the  name / software name / server name / host platform name if you really want and as appropriate.  They might be running 10 different web based applications with acronyms for names which are totally meaningless to people outside they’re group, but they all run on Apache, or IIS, or whatever, and while they probably don’t care about any of that, giving them the information if you can do so without too much extra effort, either on your part to generate it or their part to listen, can only improve their understanding of how things work.    Yes, it probably makes your communications a little more wordy than you’d like.  No, they probably won’t really care what things are called as long as you fix it.   -- There are 10 kinds of people in the world...          those who understand binary and those who don't.   From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of geoff Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 1:50 PM To: ntsysadm Subject: [NTSysADM] Stupid terminology question   OK sanity check please.   When referring to the system your windows O/S tied to whether it is physical or virtual what term do you use?  Essentially I need a good term that covers both physical and virtual in a single term. The best I have come up with is host but even that is confusing in some circles.  Rant below if you want to read it   <steps up on soapbox>   I have numerous clients that refer to their server by their application name.  OK, I get that.  They see their environment as important, and don't care about the underlying O/S.  But when I report some problem to them that involves the hostname they are like the proverbial deer in the headlights.   "But that's not what it is called!" they retort. In the old days I would bite my tongue and patiently explain that my hostname is the physical system supporting their environment and with faces sufficiently saved we would move on.  Now I get "But there isn't this a virtual server?"   Hence my question.   Don't even think about the discussion that ensues when it is getting underlying ESXi server that has an issue.   <soap box stowed beneath desk till next needed>   gt I'm just Playbookin' around